Monthly Archives: September 2014

EMD Millipore Corporation et al. v. AllPure Technologies, LLC

Posted on September 30, 2014 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2014-1140 PROST, O’MALLEY, HUGHES September 29, 2014 Brief Summary: DC decision of no infringement affirmed because there was no literal or DOE infringement. In addition, the FC panel concluded that, due to amendments made by Millipore, in response … Continue reading →

Posted in Doctrine of equivalents, Infringement, Prosecution History Estoppel | Leave a comment

SCA Hygeine Products Aktiebolag et al. v. First Quality Baby Products, et al.

Posted on September 27, 2014 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2013-1564 REYNA, WALLACH, HUGHES September 17, 2014 Update: see Sept. 18, 2015 en banc decision Brief Summary: FC panel affirmed DC finding of laches (more than six years delay without reasonable excuse) but reversed as to equitable estoppel … Continue reading →

Posted in Equitable estoppel, Laches | Leave a comment

Virnetx, Inc. and SAIC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. and Apple Inc.

Posted on September 18, 2014 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2013-1489 PROST, CHEN September 16, 2014 Brief Summary: DC claim construction finding reversed based on intrinsic evidence (specification). Infringment under DOE finding reversed because expert testimony did not show function in same “way”. Damages award vacated because based … Continue reading →

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Claim Construction, Claim Differentiation, Damages, Doctrine of equivalents, Expert Testimony, Inducement to Infringe, Infringement | Leave a comment

G. David Jang, M.D. v. Boston Scientific Corp. and SciMed Life Systems, Inc.

Posted on September 17, 2014 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2014-134 DYK, PLAGER, LINN September 16, 2014 Brief Summary: Request for interlocutory appeal denied because FC panel was not convinced that that would “materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation” (It is not clear that the legal … Continue reading →

Posted in Appeal | Leave a comment

Scientific Plastic Products, Inc. v. Biotage AB

Posted on September 15, 2014 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2013-1219, -1220, -1221 NEWMAN, MOORE, WALLACH September 10, 2014 Brief Summary: Soda pop bottle caps found to be analogous art to chromotagraphy caps for “address[ing] the problem of providing a fluid-tight seal at elevated pressures”. Art provided “implicit[] … Continue reading →

Posted in Analgous Art, Obviousness | Leave a comment

Interval Licensing LLC v. AOL, Inc. et al.

Posted on September 12, 2014 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2013-1282, -1283, -1284, -1285 TARANTO, CHEN September 10, 2014 Brief Summary: Claim term of degree “unobtrusive manner” found indefinite (“highly subjective”, “considerable uncertainty”). DC claim construction findings modified based on specification and technical dictionaries. Summary: Interval appealed final … Continue reading →

Posted in Claim Construction, Indefiniteness | Leave a comment

EPOS Technologies Ltd. et al. v. Pegasus Technologies Ltd. et al.

Posted on September 10, 2014 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2013-1330 HUGHES, BRYSON September 5, 2014 Brief Summary: DC claim constructions vacated because definitions improperly imported limitations from preferred embodiments and the DOE analysis was only a “shortcut”. Summary: Pegasus appealed DC grant of SJ of noninfringement of … Continue reading →

Posted in Claim Construction, Doctrine of equivalents | Leave a comment

buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc.

Posted on September 8, 2014 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2013-1575 TARANTO, HUGHES September 3, 2014 Brief Summary: The panel found that “[t]he claims in this case do not push or even test the boundaries of the Supreme Court precedents under section 101” because “the claims are squarely … Continue reading →

Posted in Patentability | Leave a comment

Arlington Industries, Inc. v. Bridgeport Fittings, Inc.

Posted on September 3, 2014 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2013-1400, -1401 PROST, LOURIE, LINN August 29, 2014 Non-precedential Brief Summary: Board agreement with examiner’s final rejection affirmed because prior art disclosure would not require “substantial reengineering”, there was no teaching away, and the secondary considerations were unpersuasive … Continue reading →

Posted in Obviousness | Leave a comment